Portable Housing

An Exploration Into Lightweight Housing for Remote Scientific Research

By Keith V. McCluskey
B.A., Modern European History (1995)
Boston College
Submitted to the Department of Architecture in Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements for the Degree of Master of
Architecture at the
Massachusetts Institute of Technology, June 2002
Copyright 2002 Keith V. McCluskey. All rights reserved.
The author hereby grants to MIT permission to reproduce and to distribute publicly paper and electronic copies of this thesis
document in whole or in part.

Signature of A uthor.....................................................................................

.......... . . .... ..
.............. D(ep rtm

.........
..
t of Architecture
May 23, 2002

Certifie d by...........................................................................................................................

...........................
Bill Hubbard Jr.
Adjunct Associate Professor of Architecture
Thesis Supervisor

Accepted by....................................................................
MASSACHUSETTS INSTITUTE

OF TECHNOLOGY

...........
Bill Hubbard Jr.
Adjunct Associate Professor of Architecture
Chairman, Department Committee on Graduate Studies

'UN 2 4 2002
ROTCH
LIBRARIES

Thesis Readers
J. Kimo S. Griggs, FAIA
Lecturer in Architecture
Graduate School of Design, Harvard University
Anne Whiston Spirn
Professor of Landscape Architecture
Department of Architecture, Massachusetts Institute of Technology

Illustration Credits
All photographs, diagrams and renderings are by the author unless otherwise noted.

Portable Housing
An Exploration Into Lightweight Housing for Remote Scientific Research
By Keith V. McCluskey
Submitted to the Department of Architecture on May 23, 2002 in Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements for the Degree of
Master of Architecture

Abstract
This thesis proposes the design of portable housing for use in scientific research applications in remote locations. Currently, remote
research is conducted from tents or other portable shelters. Larger, more hospitable structures are often too heavy or bulky to carry to
these locations. This thesis proposes a shelter that is lightweight, packable, and biodegradable.
The shelter is constructed of cardboard panels, which can easily be left to decompose in most environments, or can be recycled after use.
The shelter is meant to last only for one season (up to six months), and then be recycled. The shelter requires upkeep on a weekly basis to
maintain its waterproofness, and responds to the climatic changes of its surroundings by opening or closing as temperature and conditions
warrant. It is, hopefully, much more livable than a tent.

Thesis Supervisor: Bill Hubbard Jr.

Title: Adjunct Associate Professor of Architecture

Acknowledqements
This thesis would not have been possible without the help and support of many, many people. First and foremost, my parents and sister
deserve more credit than can be expressed here. Their patience and support, in every possible way, have helped me to keep going even
when things have been at their most difficult. They have always supported me, and urged me to pursue my dreams and desires, doing
everything possible to help me through. They have made the load much lighter, and the rewards much greater, than they otherwise would
have been. I am constantly reminded that I am very lucky to have this support, and am incredibly grateful for it.
My thesis committee also deserves a great deal of thanks. I chose my committee not just for their disparate strengths (landscape
architecture, construction and prototyping, and design), but also because of their personalities. All three are no-nonsense, and very willing
to help. This maturity and support was very welcome, and helped make this work possible.
Finally, I must express a tremendous debt of gratitude to the head of my committee, my advisor and friend Bill Hubbard. His was the first
studio I took, back in the fall of 1996. It seems only fitting that he should be the advisor to my final school project. His enthusiasm is
contagious, and his breadth of knowledge is amazing. His commitment to his students is unmatched. He helped me cultivate a love of
design six years ago, starting me on the road to becoming an architect. Now, at the end of an often difficult and sometimes dispiriting
four-year program, he has helped renew my confidence in my design abilities, and rekindle my love of all things architectural. So, Bill,
thanks so much. I might have been able to do it without you, but I doubt that I would have wanted to.

AN&t

Pu

6_
T

-0

This isn't as crazy as it looks

PORTABLE MOUNTAIN HOUSING

Athesis by Keith McCluskey
The
MIT
Department
ofArchitecture
Presents
anOpifice
Production
ofaKeith
McCluskey
thesis

Portable
Mountain
Housing
starring
Keith
McCluskey
BillHubbard
Kimo
Griggs
Anne
Whiston
SpimDaniel
Schodek
Zach
Kramer
HenRy
Chang
music
byHaptic
special
visual
effects
byAdobe
andAutoDesk
technical
consultant
ChrisDewart
location
coordinator
JimHarrington
supplies
byChanette
foodservice
byToscanini's
andPicante's
produced
written
modeled
andbuiltbyKeith
McCluskey
opitice
com/thesis

MAY 16 2002 - SOUTH CORNER

Table of Contents
Introduction: Beginnings
Chapter One: Purpose
Chapter Two: Structure
Chapter Three: Cycles
Chapter Four: Futures
Conclusion: Final Review
Appendix A, Computer Aided Design and Manufacturing
Bibliography

Introduction: Beginnings
An explanation of where this thesis came from

I have always enjoyed hiking and camping. I grew up in

the Adirondack Mountains, and have hiked and camped many
times. In my four years of graduate school, I have spent at least
some part of each spring break sleeping outside.
As an architect and designer, my greatest successes have
always come with works at a small scale. The closer I can get to
full scale, the better the design ends up, and the more fun it is to
design. 600,000 square foot convention centers are not things I
have any interest in designing. From the scale of the residence
on down, I begin to really enjoy design, since I can get into the
details, building them at close to full scale.
It seemed like an easy step, then, to choose a thesis topic
that combined those two things. By choosing a topic that
involved small wilderness shelters, the thesis, I hoped, would
allow me to hit on both these topics. It would hopefully also
engage my love of construction, and be a project that could be
discussed in terms of ecologically sound materials.
But this thesis began as something a bit different than it
ended up, as evidenced by the text of my original thesis
proposal:
PORTABLE HOUSING
An effort to create portable housing for mountainous regions
Mountainous housing in remote regions has traditionally been of
this type: bulky buildings made with an inefficient use of
materials. In log homes, for example, a good deal of timber is
used to build up the houses. Forests are clear-cut, and the
resulting timber is used to make the houses. This is inefficient,
ugly, and not environmentally sound.
The Appalachian Trail is one of the United States greatest
natural resources. It is several hundred miles of wonderful
wilderness trail, through breathtaking landscape. To build
housing along it like previous mountain housing efforts would be

to ruin it.

built or unbuilt in the space of a day.

Each year, more that thirty people traveling along the trail die as
a result of exposure, accident, or catastrophe. Hundreds are
injured. And finding help along the trail can be a daunting task.
Passing hikers can provide some help, and the trail does
intersect
several state parks, with their contingents of park rangers, and
ridge runners, but a set of trail stewards who work specifically at
safeguarding those who walk the trail might be an improvement.
This thesis proposes the creation of that group of stewards, and
with that, housing for those stewards.

- Stealth: The building, once disassembled, must leave virtually

no trace.
No foundation, no clear-cutting of timber, no
excavation. While it stands, it must not be a distraction on the
trail.

This thesis is challenged on two levels. First, on the social level:

Does the Appalachian Trail warrant such a group of stewards?
Would the Appalachian Trail Conference, the Trail's governing
body, want, or be able to afford, stewards? Would they be able
to coordinate the logistics of putting them in place? And would
they agree that stewards are a help on the trail, and not a
detriment or a distraction? Would the work of the stewards not
simply duplicate that of the ridge runners?
This challenge is really secondary. If the Appalachian Trail is not
the appropriate site, there are certainly dozens of other regions
where ultra-lightweight housing would be of benefit.
Mountainous regions around the world would benefit from
housing that is portable by people, and is quickly and easily
assembled and disassembled, leaving virtually no trace.
This leads to the second, and perhaps more primary, challenge
of the thesis. If there are to be Trail stewards, they will be
required to live on the trail for the greater part of the year, in
some very harsh climates. Their housing will have to meet
several strict requirements:
- Incredible lightness: The housing must be able to be carried on
the backs of hikers - each segment must be of a size (2'x4' max)
and weight (30 # max) that can be easily handled by a hiker.
- Ease and speed of assembly: The housing must be able to be

- Climatic concerns: The trail is a harsh environment. The

structure must withstand wind, rain, cold, and snow. The space
must also be heated to some degree, and thus insulated to
conserve heating resources.
- Livability: The space must be accommodating enough that
someone can live in it for six months of the year, year after year.
It cannot be a simple tent.
The avenues of research and methodology for this thesis will be
several. First, a study must be made of the Appalachian Trail,
and the people who are a part of it: it's governing body and the
many who use it each year. Studies of rates of injury and death,
and studies as to whether or not stewards would alleviate any of
that must be undertaken. Where would these stewards be
placed so as to be most effective?
Studies then must be made into the appropriate structure, and its
design. Tent prototypes are one option. But by no means is the
tent the only option. Domes and transportable panel systems
must be studied against tensile structures, to see which yields
the best result for the least weight.
Details of the structure must then be hashed out. The house
prototype must be designed, and it should hopefully go beyond a
one-room tent or shack. View, light and spatial considerations
must be considered. The space must be designed in such a way
that someone would willingly live there for nine months, and
several years on end, earning a relatively low wage.
Studies must be conducted into the appropriate materials and
costs. New composite materials certainly suggest themselves
for their lightness, but are they environmentally sound? Is

Shigeru Ban's cardboard and paper tube architecture a

possibility? Which material has the best insulative properties
relative to weight?
Once material decisions have been made, the prototype must be
designed, down to the nuts and bolts. Details must be designed
to facilitate ease and speed of construction. The fasteners
themselves become an issue. Boxes of heavy nails and screws
are probably not the best option. It is my hope that the structure
will integrate some of the furnishings of the space, to allow yet
again for fewer and lighter trips to the site.
Once this is done, an attempt will be made to build the structure,
if not in its entirety then in some collection of details. Full-scale
models will very much allow a test of the ultimate proposition of
the thesis, that it must be very light.
This thesis, if successful, will have covered almost all of the
areas that interest me architecturally: sustainability and
environmentally sound design, new material types, design and
prototyping of components and parts, and the assembly of
buildings. Most importantly, it will challenge me as a designer:

can I create a building that is well enough designed that it is not

a distraction to the hikers on the trail, while allowing the occupant
Most
some measure of civilized and comfortable living?
importantly, can I make architecture exist, high in some remote
part of some mountain trail?
After discussions with several people, including Chris
Carbone of the Building Technology department, it was
determined that the Appalachian Trail did not need additional
stewards. Chris had worked for a few years as a ridge runner,
and said that the idea of additional stewards was redundant.
Compounded with the additional problem of getting permits for
any type of construction on the trail, Chris suggested that I look
elsewhere for a vehicle for my thesis. He suggested that this
type of housing would be ideal for scientists doing long-term
research in the wild. Both advisors, Kimo and Bill, suggested
this would be a sound idea, since it would allow more character
to be imbued into our fictional occupant, since a scientist has
obvious tasks and spatial and programmatic needs. And so, two
weeks into the thesis semester, the change was made.

This diesis is challenged on tio levels. First, on the social level: Does the Appalachian Trail warrant such a
group of stewards? Wo'buldthe Appalachian Trail Conference, the Trail's governing body, want, or be able to
afford, stewards? Would they be able to coordinate the logistics of putting them in place? And would they
agree that stewards are a help on the trail, and not a detriment or a distraction?
This challenge is really secondarty. If the Appalachian Trail is not the appropriate sire,there are certainly dozens
of other regions where ultra-lightweight housing would be of benefit. Mountainous regions around the world
would benefit from housing that is portable by people, and is quickly and easily assembled and disassembled,
leaving virtually no trace.
This leads to the second. and perhaps more primary, challenge of the thesis. If there are to be Trail stewards,
they will be required to live on the trail for the greater part of the year, in some very harsh climates. Their
housing will have to meet several strict equirenents:
- Incredible lightness: The housing must be able to be carried on the backs of hikers - each segtment must be of
a iec (2'x4' max) and weight (30 # max) that can be easily handled by a hiker.
-

Ease and speed of assembly: The housing must be able to be built or unbuilt in the space of a day.

Stealth: The building, once disassembled, itust leavevirrually noi trace. No foundation, no clear-cutting of
timber. no excavation. While it stands, it must not be a distraction on the trail.
-

- Climatic concerns: The trail is a harsh environment. The structure must withstand wind, rain, cold, snow, etc.
The space must also be heated to some degree, and thus insulated to conserve heaiing resources.
- I.ivability: The spacemust be accommodating enough that someone can live in it for nine months of the year,
year after year. It cannot be a simple tent.

STUDIES
OFANCIENT
TENT
PROTOTYPES

Figure 1: Original thesis document, page 1.

11

The avenues of research and methodology for this thesis will be several. First, a study must be Made Of the
Appalachian Trail, and the people who are a part of it: it's governing body and the many who use it each year.
Studies of rates of injury and death, and studies as to whether or not stewards would alleviate any of that must
be undertaken. Where would these stewards be placed soas to be most effective?
Studies then must be made into the appropriate structure, and its design. Tent prototypes are shown below. But
by no means is the tent the only option. Domes ad transportable panel systems must be studied against tensile
structures, to seewhich yields the best result for the least weight,

This thesis, if succesful,swillhavecovered almost all of the areasthat interest me architecturally: sustainabiliv
and environmentally sound design, new matenal types.,
desigi and protorvping of components and parts, the
assembly of buildings, etc... Most importanty, it will challenge me as a designer: can I create a building i hat
is well enough designed that it is not a distraction to the hikers on the trail, while allowing the occupant
some measure of civilized and comfortable living? Most importantly, can I make architecture exist, high in
some remote pat of some mountain trail?

Details of the structure must then be hashed out. The house prototype must be designed, and it should
hopefully go beyond a one-room tent or shack. View, light and spatial considerations must beconsidered.
The space must be designed in such a way that someone would willingly live there for nine months, aid
several yearsotnend, earnitg a relatively low wage.
Studies must be conducted into the appropriate materials and costs. New composite materials certainly suggest
themselves for their lightness, but are they environmentalls souind Is Shigeru Han's paper tube architecture a
possibility? Which material has the best insulative properties relative to weighr?
Once material decisions have been made, the prototype must be designed, down to the nuts and bolts. Details
must be designed to facilitate easeand speed of construction. The fasteners themselves become an issue. Boxes
of heavy nails and screws are probably not the best option. It is my hope that the structure will integrate some
of the furnishings of the space, to allow yet again for fewer and lighter trips to the site.
Once this is done, an attempt will be made to build the structure, if not in its entirety then in some collection
of details. Full scale models will very much allow a test of the ultimate proposition of the thesis, that it must
be very very light.

NEWTENTTYPES

INSPIRATION

iSGEIU
BAN

A
Ml

:*~

K~ 7~I~
~

4,e

LJ

14j

j
i'A

4-4

Figure 2: Original thesis document, page 2.

SOL--,

Chapter One: Purpose

Research into spaces a scientist could use

After deciding on designing a shelter for a scientist, it

became necessary to do research into the needs of a scientist in
the wild. The initial inspiration for scientists in the wild came
from the New York Times Magazine, in an article entitled
"George Divoky's Planet". George Divoky is an ornithologist
who has been studying a group of guillemots and their relation to
global warming on Cooper Island in the Arctic for the past thirty
years.' He lives in a simple tent, and has a rough shelter, called
the weatherport, which he and his assistant share, since using
only tents for four months is uncomfortable.

WhenGrome (wdd.-s -n.

ra

E.

n inm the

wearhe~

<a
on),pins him. :behunun popu!.a,,on

Cnovper
I~im
me,
....
e 10operemr

Figure 3: George and Tamara in the weatherport. (Image courtesy of

the New York Times magazine)

This article was inspirational in that it showed that there

were people doing research who could potentially use this
shelter.

Frey, p. 26

The original idea was to create a shelter and place it in

New Hampshire, since the AT was close there and could be
easily visited. Also, since I had decided on using biodegradable
materials, and cardboard became the chosen material, New
Hampshire seemed a good fit since it is one of the leading states
in pulp and paper manufacture.
Chris Carbone suggested I contact someone he knew
who did those kinds of research at Dartmouth. Our schedules
didn't mesh, but he put me on to the Hubbard Brook Research
Forest, in northern New Hampshire. I was lucky enough to
speak with Ralph Perron, a researcher there. He very generously
set up a time for me to come visit the Forest, and scheduled my
trip to coincide with the weekly gathering of data. I spent one
lovely Monday morning hiking around Hubbard Brook with Ian
Halm, another of the researchers there. Every Monday, all year
round, the people at Hubbard Brook measure rainfall data, and
flow data from all the creeks that flow into Hubbard Brook. Ian
and I spent the morning hiking to about ten rainwater collection
sites, and four different weirs, which measure flow in the creeks
and streams. The collection of data is straightforward, and
involves mostly pencil and notebooks. Ian suggested that
someday the collection would all be digital, but the high prices
prevented that now. Luckily for me I had chosen a day to visit
when the weather was good. Often, Ian is hiking in rain, or
snowmobiling and snowshoeing, collecting data in freezing
temperatures. In the summer, the data collection all takes place
while surrounded by biting insects.

Figure 4 Hubbard Brook Research Forest. (Image courtesy of

www.hubbardbrook.org)

After discussing my thesis topic with him for the better

part of the morning, it became clear that there might be a use for
my 'cardboard house'. Ian suggested that it was rare for people
to do scientific research for that long in the wild, and that it
would most probably only be animal researchers who would
want to be that far removed from civilization for that long. The
idea of a shelter in which you could stand up, and have space for
storage, definitely seemed better than six months in a tent,
however. Ian had spent a summer in a tent doing research, and
after a few months the tent had been bleached by the sun,
smelled, and was generally unpleasant. Now, my shelter hasn't
been tested. It too may bleach and begin to smell, but at the very
least it has room to stand up, and operable windows that allow
ventilation.
Bolstered by this day of hiking and discussion with Ian
and Ralph, I pushed on with the design of the actual structure

and details. I am deeply grateful to them, and to Hubbard Brook,

for their tremendous generosity in allowing me to visit and hike
with them.

Figure 6: An initial sketch of the idea.

Figure 5: The view of Mount Washington from the south slope.

17

Chapter Two: Structure

Making the idea stand up

A good amount of research went into the design of the

structural elements. Brainstorming sessions with my committee,
discussions with the Building Technology faculty, and full-scale
component testing allowed me to get to the point where this
project is physically possible.
For it to be made real,
would
need to occur. But in
testing
optimization and further
only four months, to have gotten to the point of the idea being
actually possible, is quite thrilling.
There are several areas of concern that were addressed in
the structural analysis: the floor, which is the basis for the whole
structure; the panel system, including the windows and joints;
and the roof system, which ended up being a canvas panel.

Floor
The floor was the initial structural component that was
discussed, since it is the basis and also originally was the
packing system for the whole structure. Originally, the floor was
folded into two pieces, and framed out like a backpack, allowing
a space on the inside for transportation of materials. The panels
were later flattened and the floor was to be supported by tension
members. This was later changed, to allow the floor to match
the wall panels and reduce the number of components and
The final
increase the number of assembly possibilities.
rendition of the floor is supported by the same L-shaped beams
as the walls. Made of corrugated cardboard, these beams are
quite strong when glued along the seams.
The following images show the sequence of design
ideas:

Figure 7: The first floor system.

Figure 9: Second floor system.

it.

t~s.
C.
0

IWA

p
34

jK' fl
2$

Figure 8: Note the beams, which fold into a pack.

Figure 10: Note the tension members and posts.

4,

it

0
TA, --> ( J.

--I
P ek

Figure 12: Connection, post to floor.

~1~
7

---. ~27

Figure 11: Original post for tension system.

Figure 13: Connection, full-scale mockup.

Figure 15: The mockup, exploded.

Figure 14: The final foot at full scale.

Figure 16: The clips.

Panels and Window

The panels were built in the same way as the floor, a trifold panel with dado cuts along the outside edges to take a
spline. They were supported by the same L-shaped beams as
were used on the floor. For details of this, see the assembly
sequence. The three fold system is set at a size that fits on the
back, and also expands to a comfortable interior height.
The panels differed from the floor in that they had to
accommodate windows. The first window was prototyped in
Kimo Griggs' Computer Aided Design and Manufacture Class
(see Appendix A). What follows are some images of the
window prototype.

Figure 18: Window profile

Figure 17: Vacuum formed window and mold.

Figure 19: The window prototype, open for ventilation.

Figure 20: The window in the demonstration model.

Roof
The roof was the final piece of the design. Several ideas
were explored using flat roofs, but these were deemed too
heavy, not strong enough, or too difficult to erect. Finally, the
idea of a canvas roof, with all its benefits, was adopted. The
canvas allows breathability, is light, naturally softens the
sunlight while illuminating the interior, and can be waterproofed.
It was decided to tension two pieces of canvas opposite each
other, to create a peak to shed water and to add strength. It also
creates a section within the space. The roof is cable-stayed to
the ground or surrounding trees, and is operable: it can be lifted
in warm weather to allow even more ventilation.

Figure 22: Full-scale roof, with tension member.

'>4I

Figure 21: Sketches of roof design with operability.

Figure 23: Early roof prototype.

Once canvas had been decided upon, it took on more

uses. Instead of only having punched openings for light, canvas
panels were used to cover part of one wall, above the sleeping
area, to allow more light in. In the final design, these faced east
and allowed in the morning light. Canvas is easy to attach with
the sole building material, starch glue.

Figure 24: Canvas panels on the 1/3 scale model. Note the overhang of
canvas, for shelter outside in warm months.

Figure 25: Initial sketch of the canvas panels.

Assembly and Component Pieces

Figure 26: Final assembly sequence renderings, hopefully self explanatory. All the pieces of cardboard - panels, splines, and L shapes - are assembled
with starch glue. Metal feet, rods, and clamps, plastic windows, and canvas roof and panels add to the cardboard kit.

R ow 1-i
oge

cre

t -r

'7

-m7cl

1F3
C0.AG

NfOfX
-

--

tic
'A,

G -qF-

Lee-k,

kP

c-D LoAuw-

At-

r.4A

(0

NTJT>

UL44 7c

Figure 27: Assembly sequence sketch.

-A-)

CQu

,j

A-

ed Es

fC(,:

cLA- v

,A

~IA -

~A)j

k.

Uy

AO

- T-15

Figure 28: The component parts, all laid out, at full scale.

Figure 29: The relative size of the pack of components.

;V<'

21

4.

~r.
Figure 30: Diagramming the wall construction sequence.

---'.4
-'4
#3

:4

Figure 31 An interior sketch showing the placement of the columns.

Figure 32: The L-columns, used in the walls and floor.

31

Chapter Three: Cycles

Making a shelter that agrees with nature

One of the ideas of this project is that the occupant is

more closely connected to the natural world through the shelter.
This may sound like an outrageous idea, but it is meant only on
the most simple level. The building is cyclical in nature: It
exists with the seasons, being built up and taken down in six
months from spring to fall. It requires weekly maintenance in
order to maintain its waterproofness and soundness. This weekly
work could be integrated with the weekly scientific work - two
days to science, two days to the shelter and the site. And on a
daily basis the cycle would be the same as any camping or hiking
endeavor: getting water, cooking, doing the work, and so forth.
This cyclical relationship with the environment is very
common in scientific research. For instance, at Hubbard Brook,
every week the routine is the same. But every week there are
different challenges that present themselves and must be
addressed. Similarly in the wild, each week would have the
same schedule, but each would play out differently depending on
the circumstances encountered by the occupant. The basic
weekly schedule would also involve one trip a week back to
wherever the scientist came from, perhaps staying overnight, in
order to restock supplies and drop off collected data.
There would also be a seasonal relationship with the site.
As the occupant lives there, she could adjust the shelter to her
needs. More windows could be added as views were found.
And earthworks could be built up not only to protect the shelter
from rainwater runoff, but also to create a space around the
shelter, extending it into the outside. At the end of the season,
the shelter would either be taken back, or left to decompose,
depending on the environment. But the earthwork could remain,
as a marker of the inhabitation, and as something that could be
built on later.

It,
t

fir

'V

'C

Figure 34: Site model. Note the burm behind the shelter.

/
4,

Figure 33: Diagram of the weekly cycle.

Figure 35: The shelter in the environment.

Al'

~EY

~
.~

Figure 36: Initial ideas for window placement, to take advantage of

views.

~-2

Figure 37 Window revision, with Bill's assistance.

35

Chapter Four: Futures

This project has come been designed primarily with the

idea of scientific research.
But clearly there are other
applications where this shelter would be applicable, from
disaster relief to military applications.
Within the realm of scientific research, the project has
reached the level of the possible. With testing and optimization,
the shelter could easily be realized. As a modular system, it is
easily adaptable to other situations. It can be sized to fit
whatever needs arise.

Other possibilities for the shelter

~z

LU
L~J

Figure 38: Diagrams of future possibilities.

37

Conclusions: Final Review

May 16, 2002 South Corner

Figure 39: The final review. (Image courtesy Donyce McCluskey.)

The day of the final review came and, after a few solid
weeks of very little sleep, everything was ready. The review, as
a whole, went well. The critics offered tough, but fair,
criticisms, asking questions on a variety of topics. A DVD of the
review will be included at the end of this book.
The jurors, from left to right in the above picture: Bill
Hubbard Jr., Advisor; Stanford Anderson, Department Head;
Carol Bums; George Thrush; Kimo Griggs, Reader; Anne Spirn,
Reader; Reinhard Goethert; and Marlon Blackwell.
What follows are the images from the final presentation.

Figure 40: Hardline drawings.

Figure 41: The 1/3 scale model.

40

Figure 42: A second look.

41

Figure 43: A montage of the model in nature.

42

Figure 44: The full scale model.

43

Figure 45: A second look.

44

Figure 46: A third look.

Figure 47: View from the inside, out.

46

Figure 48: The reasons why.

47

48

Appendix A: Computer-Aided Design and Manufacture

I would like to express my thanks to Kimo Griggs and Dan Schodek of the GSD for allowing me in his class, GSD 6319. I
learned a tremendous amount about computer-aided manufacture, and this had a deep impact on my thesis. It was in this class that I
developed the window ideas, and moved from the initial dome and panel idea to the idea of a folding panel, while paying close attention to
ease of assembly.

DOME CONSTRUCTION PROTOTYPES

Flat panel construction for ease of transportation

Lightweight, biodegradeable materials waxed paper skin and cellulose insulation
Panels come attached as units for ease of assembly

Vacuum formed or molded windows and oculus also

break down into flat, stackable pieces
Clip hangers allow for lightweight, easy assembly
Domes are cable restrained from the inside to provide
extra stiffness, resistance to uplift

Questions:
Is this a habitable space? Would a different shape
be more appropriate?
Is it structurally strong enough? Will the connections
hold?

Figure 49: The very early dome idea for the shelter. Many thanks to Kimo Griggs and Dan Schodek for steering me away from this.

50

Bibliography
Books
Adamson, Bo and Jonsson, Semeonova, Sherbakov; Design of Low Energy Houses with Lightweight Walls and Roofs in
Severely Cold Climates; Swedish Council for Building Research, Stockholm 1987
Balmond, Cecil; Number 9: The Search for the Sigma Code; Prestel, NY 1998
Beaver, Patrick; The Crystal Palace; Hugh Evelyn, London 1970
Berger, Horst; Light Structures, Structures of Light; Birkhauser, Basel 1996
Beukers, Adriaan and van Hinte; Lightness; 010 Publishers, Rotterdam 1999
Busat, Pierre; La Coordination Modulaire dans le Batiment; Kramer, Stuttgart 1963
Cereghini, Mario; Building in the Mountains; Milliano, Milan 1957
Drew, Philip; Tensile Architecture; Westview Press, Boulder 1979
Eekhout, Mick; Architecture in Space Structures; 010 Publishers, Rotterdam 1989
Farrell, Terry; Lightweight Classic; Cheerman, London 1993
Hennessey, James and Papanek; Nomadic Furniture 1; Pantheon Books, NY 1973
Hitchcock, H R; The Crystal Palace; MIT Press, Northampton 1951
IL; IL5 5: Convertible Roofs; Verlag, Stuttgart 1972
IL; IL 37: Ancient Architects; Verlag, Stuttgart 1994

IL; IL 41: Buildinq With Intelliqence; Verlag, Stuttgart 1995

International Conference on Liqhtweiqht Structures in Architecture; Unisearch, Kensington 1986
Kawamata, Tadashi; Temporary Structures; Shoin, Kyoto 1991
McKean, John; Crystal Palace: Joseph Paxton and Charles Fox; Phaidon Press, London 1994
Mollerup, Per; Collapsible: The Genius of Space-Saving Design; Chronicle Books, San Francisco 2001
Otto, Frei; Liqhtweiqht Structures; University of Cal Berkely 1963
Schierle, Gotthilf Goetz, ed.; Liqhtweiqht Tension Structures; University of Cal Berkely, 1968
Schulte, Karin; Temporary Buildinqs; Avedition, Stuttgart 1997
Scott, Andrew; Dimensions of Sustainability; E & F N, New York 1999
Sebestyen, Gyula; Liqhtweiqht Buildinq Construction; John Wiley, New York 1977
Theses
Bonnemaison, Sarah; Liqhtweight Structures in Urban Desiqn; MIT, 1983
Chin, Ryan; An Exploration of Materials and Methods in Manufacturing: Shoreline Membranes; MIT 2000
Sigfusson, Gerdur; 'This Wonderful World of Mobile Home Living'; MIT 1997
Slaughter, Elisabeth Sarah; 'Rapid' Innovaion and Integraition of Components; MIT 1991
Tulay, Scott; A Process of Subdivision: Creating a Therapeutic Environment for a Northampton Mental Health Community;
MIT 1992
Turkel, Joel; Arctic House; MIT 1999

Articles
Frey, Darcy; "George Divoky's Planet"; The New York Times Magazine; January 6, 2002, Section 6, pp. 24-33; The New York
Times, New York 2002

Web Sites
Homestar Runner; www.homestarrunner.com
Icosa: The Pod; http://www.icosavillaqe.net/default.html
Appalachian Trail in NH; http://www.cs.dartmouth.edu/whites/at.html
NH Ecological Reserve System Project; http://ceinfo.unh.edu/forestry/documents/nhecosrv.htm#Eco Req
The Hubbard Brook Ecosystem Study; http://www.hubbardbrook.orq/
Weights of Various Materials from READE; http://www.reade.com/Particle Briefinqs/spec qra2.html
Topozone; http://www.topozone.com/default.asp
Keith McCluskey; www.opifice.com

This page intentionally left blank.